Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/The Trial of a Time Lord/archive1


 * The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was not promoted 00:57, 28 April 2008.

The Trial of a Time Lord
I'm nominating this article for featured article because my rewrite of the article has significantly changed the article's quality. I think as far as a season article goes, it's along the same lines of quality as Lost (season 2), but the production and reception section has prompted opinions that it should be instead be an FA rather than a FL. And yes, I do know the lack of diversity of sources: this is a 22-year-old topic for when Doctor Who was rather unpopular, thus a lack of reviews and production interviews; instead, the article relies on two reliable sources which have themselves extracted from reliable sources. Sceptre (talk) 22:23, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment Something is wrong with the formatting of the ultimate references: you have two "Television Companion"s (presumably the second one is actually the dis-continuity guide).  There is a rogue "Terrence Dicks" in the second reference.  I think that the publishers are wrong (Telos may have done reprints, but I don't think that they were the original publishers).  The references that are presumably to Doctor Who Magazine don't actually name the magazine. Bluap (talk) 23:29, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Fixed them; the errors came around when I had to templatise the references. Sceptre (talk) 23:35, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Comments All links checked out, sources look okay to me. Ealdgyth - Talk 03:20, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Comment. I am neither supporting nor opposing this nomination. However, I must express strong doubt regarding the lack of sources. Doctor Who as a program is one of the most written about shows in modern times. (It is comparable to the Star Trek universe in North America.) It is a hotly debated and widely discussed serial. It is the last major appearance of the ever-popular Sixth Doctor. The infamous Valeyard and Master both play central roles. Taken together, this indicates to me that it is extremely unlikely there is any dearth of sources for this serial. Vassyana (talk) 21:32, 19 April 2008 (UTC) Comment. Withdrawn after research. Vassyana (talk) 02:12, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
 * The Sixth Doctor wasn't exactly popular. Still, I doubt more sources are really needed: The production section is adequately summarise without going too much in-depth, and it doesn't lack detail either. I'd rather not put more sources than necessary in the article. I was actually more concerned about the lack of sources for reception, to be honest; I can't find any contemporary reviews for that particular article (and, IIRC, Ep. 4 was one of the lowest ratings Doctor Who has ever had). Sceptre (talk) 22:08, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Comment—Quite good, but could do with a comb-through to polish the writing. Here are a few things I picked up just at the top. (not the whole story, of course)
 * MOS breach—why the bolded item end of first line?
 * "the titles given in this article are common titles used in novelisations and production"—spot the two redundant words.
 * "put on hiatus"—Is this idiomatic?
 * " BBC controller Michael Grade wished for the series to contain less violent content"—reference? If that para is all covered by ref 2 (at bottom), perhaps another 2 earlier as well? TONY   (talk)  14:20, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Doctor Who (season 23) redirects there. And yes, the whole paragraph is supported by ref #2. Sceptre (talk) 14:41, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Two comments — On the whole, the article is well-written but:
 * What does this mean? Howe and Walker's opinion of the serials when treated segments was more positive.
 * ..who withdrew his completion of the former's final serial. Isn't "former" an adjective?

--Graham Colm Talk 18:29, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
 * "Howe and Walker..." was a glitch in writing, the term "former" is used to denote Holmes. Sceptre (talk) 10:01, 22 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Comment I'm going to review this (this is just placeholder so I don't forget...) Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ( talk  ) 02:13, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Okay, anyhow, a rather peculiar setup, to be sure, but looks pretty good. I have some minor grammar points:
 * "The serial is the last appearance of Colin Baker in the lead role of the Sixth Doctor and Nicola Bryant in the role of Perpugilliam "Peri" Brown, the Doctor's companion; their last appearances are The Ultimate Foe and Mindwarp respectively" could you explain what 'The Ultimate Foe' and 'Mindwarp' are? This sentence seems a little awkward.
 * "On its original broadcast, public reaction was mixed; it was viewed by fewer people but was appreciated more by the audience." Also a bit unclear; do you mean to say it was critically received but had lower rankings? Could you reword it then? Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ( talk  ) 01:09, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
 * The second sentence is supposed to mean "Not many people watched the episode, but those who did liked it better than the last season". (I think episode four was a record low for Doctor Who at that point). Sceptre (talk) 09:10, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.